MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402452701 · doi:10.11159/icbes24.002

Open-Source Design of Medical Devices: A Useful Biomedical Engineering Tool for Developing Countries

2024· article· en· W4402452701 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ramón Farré

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpen sourceComputer scienceSoftware engineeringSoftwareOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medical devices play an important role in disease management and pose an increasing economic burden worldwide.Current commercially available medical devices are effective but, given their elevated cost, are unaffordable for most patients in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs).The open-source hardware approach is a relatively new design option for conceiving and distributing the comprehensive technical information required for building devices.Therefore, open-source enables free and unrestricted use of the know-how to replicate and manufacture a device or modify its design for improvements.This approach thus aims at implementing open-source solutions that will contribute to widespread low-cost medical device availability in LMICs [1].To ensure feasible implementation in LMICs, the device design should be conceptualized by co-design with a local team of medical and technical professionals.Special focus on devices built using general-purpose, low-cost electronic components (e.g., transducers, actuators, microprocessor) available in the internet market (e.g., Amazon, Alibaba) and on mechanical pieces obtained from simple 3D printers ensure affordability.Device construction using the open-source technical information provided should require only basic tools and be implementable by personnel with relatively inexperienced engineering training levels.The device functionality should be tested and validated in clinical settings.The open-source design is widely applicable to routine medical equipment since most commonly used medical devices are based on often simple technological principles, which originated decades ago and are no longer restricted by patents [2].Examples (e.g., www.open-source-medical-devices.com)cover a wide range of applications, from a device aimed at improving wound healing, to respiratory ventilators, newborn incubators and a setting for heat shock reduction risk in infants.The development pathway of the approach and its practical expansion within LMICs face several challenges, namely to engage more interdisciplinary local teams of physicians and engineers, and to expand the routine practices leading to clinical trial approval by local hospital ethics boards to ensure patient safety.However, the already available experiences strongly suggest that the open-source approach is a viable procedure to facilitate access to life-saving treatments in LMICs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and ScienceSame topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207